Search results

I guess in that regards the College of Swords is a very specific call back to the knife-eating performer, the Blade kit of 2e. College of Valour is the Bardic Warlord.

So, Primal Power Source?

My issue with that is that it pigeon-holes College of Valour into Sword-Bard. Bow is a very viable Valour option, as are other weapons. It's a broader concept.

I mean, it looks more like Bladesinger Wizard and Eldritch Knight Fighter, but doesn't have to be about Swords. So in this regards its its own fix for v5.0-5.1 Valour.

This is very interesting, because it's essentially the same philosophy as PoLand / Nerath / Nentir Vale campaigns – take the rough sketches and make it completely your own. They divorced it from Greyhawk but included classic modules in the game world depicted on the map from Conquest of Nerath...

Not anymore.

I disagree with some of the OP's definitions of male/female or species assignments. A bunch are androgynous, for example. But the art looks great.

None of them, because Generative AI doesn't create art, it steals other people's IP.

Invocations is actually an interesting idea. I've always thought that the 4e Shaman should be a Warlock subclass and invocation kit set. Ranger invocations or something like it for specialized builds is an interesting concept. I do wonder how this aligns with the philosophy of the Warlock being...

Duskmourn is sorta like Strange Things but in a mixture of the Backrooms, Luigi's Mansion, and Ghostbusters. Bloomburrow would be a very interesting campaign setting, but require completely rebalancing characters and species becomes far more important for your power set than your class… it's...

This. My concern is that generalist character archetypes get shafted when you push towards highly specialized archetypes. Look at the last UA version of the Psion – it was essentially a d8 Hit Die and some proficiencies, as a carrying chassis for 4 otherwise unrelated Psionic subclasses. Or look...

It's worth bringing up that it happened, but yeah, speculation is poison. It twists us into more extreme versions of ourselves.

That sounds like too many angles of specialization in my book – more of a GURPS system, where it's hard too be a decent generalist and you have to specialize or else you're behind on the power curve significantly. The 8 schools of magic are more than just for Wizards; it's just that they have 8...

I don't think v5.2 is wrong to allow the Beast Master Ranger to share their actions rather than sacrifice them, choosing one or the other. This was the biggest issue with the v4.0 Martial Power Beast Master and the v5.0-5.1 Beast Master. The 4e Shaman was an interesting idea of a spirit guide...

You could get Werebear and Unicorn and Gold Dragon followers in OD&D, but the pet followers really emerged in 2e (though no Tigers for you because your campaign doesn't take place in a part of the world with Tigers, obviously! DM May I is rule of the game). Combine this with the animal handling...

might be a good feat choice, but yeah, that's shocking to me too. I wonder if there's a "let your ally move again spell" that will be on the Bard list?

I think there was major pushback on this. I would expect that the way they'd go about this is give Wrathful Smite to the War Cleric on its Domain list, so that it's not poachable?

Dance Bards are like Dancers in Fire Emblem. So much so that sometimes they're replaced by Bards, sometimes they're supplemented by Bards but essentially do the same thing. They should be able to fly around the battlefield giving buffs and healing and kicking occasional enemies, but mainly...

I just don't think that Pokémon Trainer Ranger represents enough of the trope space of Rangers. Honestly, the hunter's mark space is a bit off for me too; I thought that leaning into the exploration pillar in 2014 was the right direction, the system just lacks a robust enough exploration pillar...

it could be though.